Talk:Malfunctioning Golem
Before it comes up, yes there is a version of the malfunctioning golem that has three professions simultaneously. I spent an hour zoning in an out of Oola's lab to be certain and one version of this golem is at the same time W/D/E. After more observation 2/3 of the malfunctioning golems now appear to be triple profession. :Well... that's odd. These would be the first tri-classed creatures I know. Can someone else confirm this? --Xiu Kuro 15:07, 5 October 2007 (UTC) ::Cosmitz should be able to vouch, its on the main Oola discussion page. Summit Dreamer is the only other triple (occasionally) I have observed so far...but I have a feeling there are more out there. :::I know this is a difficult request but can anyone verify if the Dervish and Elementalist versions actually using any warriors skills? - [[User:Blue.rellik|'b.r']] // ''talk'' 12:26, 4 June 2008 (UTC) Split I would suggest that we just split this up to avoid confusion. Silver Sunlight 13:31, 8 June 2008 (UTC) :I wouldn't split up the article, I'd just use 3 Beastinfo boxes. It's not as if there is enough information to go round to make 3 articles; there is none that is specific to these beasts other than theri profession and skillset. --mendel 14:45, 8 June 2008 (UTC) :See demo: User:M.mendel/Sandbox/Malfunctioning_Golem. (I can't get the image to display properly, there is no way to upload it to my sandbox and a redirect seems to not work, either). --mendel 15:07, 8 June 2008 (UTC) ::Yeah that could work as well, more understandable than the current version. Silver Sunlight 15:16, 8 June 2008 (UTC) :::I don't see anything wrong with the current setup - I can understand it just fine. Repeating the infobox (and the large image inside it) just looks bad. —Dr Ishmael 16:06, 8 June 2008 (UTC) ::::My problem was more with Warwick making them all one "order" of profession than anything else... The article doesn't have to split up if it stays like this. Silver Sunlight 16:24, 8 June 2008 (UTC) ::::These are three different monsters that happen to share the same look (like the Grentches) and the same in-game name. If we ever do a beast database like the skills, there need to be three entries or lots of kludging in the database. For now, it can stay like this. I shrunk the image in the sandbox to 128 px like the Beastinfo default, though, and now the box is as high as the skill list in my browser. Looks better. --mendel 23:47, 8 June 2008 (UTC) :::::If and until we create this "beast database" (and I'm not sure where you got the idea that we have a "skills database," it's just a bunch of related templates that are kludged together to kinda act like one), I don't see a need to split this article. If there were any functional difference between them, say if they showed up in different places (like the two versions of Scythe of Chaos), then I would push for a split, but as it is, they are identical except for the skillset, and that can be presented perfectly well in a single article. —Dr Ishmael 01:02, 9 June 2008 (UTC) ::::::Yes, we agree. The presentation can stay in one article even if the beastinfo was split and transcluded, but that's hypothetical at this point. The skills are an object-oriented database of sorts, but becasue no-one's seen it that way yet, it's not optimized to work like one. And Template Code is a pretty pure functional language, but again I doubt many people realize this. --mendel 08:23, 9 June 2008 (UTC)